Aggressive, brave and tough. Our wussy days are over.

DEMOCRATIC Leaders. Maybe learn how Congress works from those who have been there. Like Pelosi and Waters.

doesn't believe that she is the first and only true progressive in politics.

I suspect she's much smarter, more grounded and far less presumptuous than some of her more zealous acolytes - and has enough common sense and savvy not to let them goad her into making a fool of herself.

That sounds silly.

did to get AOC elected.

I know why and I know what is going to happen because I learn from history.

I'm right there with you, Eliot.

and those too few seats in the Senate we need to take in 2020. But some of us just need to fight over different styles to reach common goals to the ultimate detriment of our goals.

Frustrating. Deja vu all over again.

"You didn't say, 'Oh my GOD! She's so AWESOME in every way!!!' so you don't like her" defense works.

any of those things listed.

And she did give Dubya a pass.

any Dem right of AOC?

"Corporate," even.

It's not like Democrats are the party of diversity and free thought or anything.

Please tell me what should have been done when the Senate was controlled by republicans, and that majority refused to bring up President Obama’s SC nominee for a hearing?

Please tell me when supposedly self-identified progressives refused to vote for the Democratic nominee in 2016 because they were duped by the Jill Steins, Susan Sarandons, Cornell West’s, etc. that there was no difference between republicans and Democrats, and the SC didn’t matter, the same bullshit Ralph Nader used, and they did contribute to who we now have in the WH, not only have no regrets for not voting for the Democratic nominee in 2016, but seem to want to cast blame on those damn establishment Democrats who gave us Medicare, Medicaid, the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, SC justices such as Ruth Bader Ginsberg, etc., when perhaps if they want to cast blame p they should just look in the mirror

Much like Schumer is suggesting right now with the shutdown, the suggestion was that the democrats should have prevented any business from occurring until the nominee got a hearing. Not sure that works but....

Not sure what the second paragraph has to do with the OP, since I don't think either the leadership, or the new members did any of those things. And the current leadership didn't "give" us any of the things you list. Those go back to the days of the great society (save Ginsberg, and not many of them were around for that either) and none of the current leadership were around at the time. Truth is, the new members are basically advocating going BACK to those issues. Heck, they want to go back all the way to FDR in many ways when we advocated for universal healthcare coverage and guaranteed incomes.

Clinton were establishment Democrats, and the argument that there is no difference between Democrats or republicans, "because of the establishment Democrats" is BS. President Obama was considered an establishment Democrat. During the ACA discussions he was being trashed from both the left and the right. The left said he didn't give us Medicare for All, ignoring the fact that the votes weren't there. The blue dog Democrats made it very clear they would not vote for that. It was a question of getting something or nothing. The right viewed it as "socialism", which was untrue, but that did not matter, NOT one republican voted for it. So he did what he needed to do to at least get something through.

Dianne Feinstein was/is considered an establishment Democrat, in spite of her liberal record, gun control, women's rights, gay rights, civil rights, the environment, etc. Same with Nancy Pelosi, and I can go on.


While it is proper and healthy to critisize Democrats on specific issues, to broad brush "establishment" Democrats as the cause of all problems in the Democratic party, is disingenuous and dishonest.

The OP, and AOC's comments were about the current leadership.

Talk about thread drift.

is my suspicion

Florida’s votes should have been rejected.

The way the system worked, the GOP had the votes. I agree that it still should have been challenged, but both in Florida and in Congress, the GOP, because of gerrymandering, had to votes to prevent any successful challenge.

Our party’s unwillingness to stand on principle for fear of losing has made us look weak indecisive and unprincipled.

Sometimes you have to do the right thing regardless of the shot term consequences.

The SC decision had nothing to do with the constitutional process where congress certifies each states electoral college results.

disputed the certification of the results from Florida in 2000 (this was after the SC ruling that not all votes be counted) and asked that that delegation not be seated, alleging disenfranchisement of black people. ONE Senator doing the same thing (all in writing) would have been required for that formal objection to be considered. What would have happened after that I don't know but not one Senator could be found. Not even Gore.

How many times since then have we seen that kind of BS pursued by the Republican Party, and met with lawsuits after the fact, if at all? How might recent history have been different? Clearly unknowable, but I doubt if it would have had no effect whatever.

“Also, not all Congressional Democratic leaders did everything on my list, but some did some of these things.“

That negates the screed.

I suspect the OP meant to say "all did some". But I guess.

we had a new Senator,white male,from the great state of Minnesota who did the same thing as Ms. Cortes,and yes every friggin media company went nuts. Bottom line,they can not handle change.

Sun Light exposes the rot.

because she isn't sitting and doing nothing.

It's the first month of the job.

party any favors over the last few decades of milquetoast-y compromises, dragging the party rightward and betraying the spirit of the New Deal with corporatism.

The younger generation is fed up with world their elders have created for them.

You said a lot in few words. We need more people like you on the front lines.

And I'm not convinced our party lost the election to Trump.

It would be good to learn from other people's mistakes though. We could be a stronger party going forward if we admit what didn't work for us in recent times.

“Listening” and adhering to advice are different things. Also, learning from others mistakes is the most valuable lesson.

The promise of the new generation of Democrats is the “we call BS” attitude when it comes to RW lies. Hopefully they have a vision and get us past the political barriers of the past.

I have no doubt that she can ask the sharply pointed questions as part of an investigative committee. But that's only half the job. How well does she legislate?


I want to see:

-how well she turns her ideas into a bill
-how she presents to the relevant committee
-how she wins over the committee members so they move her bill to the Floor
-how well she gains co-sponsors and allies for the bill.
-how well she deals with debate on the bill on the Floor
-how she deals with amendments that are offered to the bill
-how well she whips and counts votes for her bill

Finally, I want to see how well she negotiates in the conference committee to reconcile a different Senate version of "her" bill and how well and fast she learns to get things done in Congress.


I have no idea how well she can do all that, so I'll wait and see. Because if she can't turn her ideas into legislation, she's in the wrong place.

Progressive NGO's are a great place for an activist who is most at home on camera and social media.

Legislating is mostly administrative and managerial, because legislation needs to be very specific in it's communication to the intended audience, which are lawmakers, lawyers, and judges. Legislation has to cross reference any other legislation that it might impact, and there is a process by which a committee develops it for markup by others.

Someone who feels that's not where there interests or skills are wouldn't do well as a legislator.

spot on..

Let others sit down and be silent.

Bill on the New Green Deal? And why hasn't she presented to the Energy and Commerce committee?